Spare the rod, spoil the child

[billvon]

I hold advanced rank in the martial arts, have a CCW and carry a .357 J - frame revolver often. Also a tactical baton, 400K stunner, a knife, a Shrike tomahawk and a .25 Beretta on appropriate occasions.

That's great. Got anything else fun? I have three parachutes and a home brewing system.

Not getting spanked has not made him a sissy or naive about violence. That is simply an odd suggestion made in order to rationalize unnecessary violence against the helpless.

This is known as a "strawman argument." It is made when a debater cannot make an argument against the position presented, so they make up a "strawman" argument that they _can_ make a valid argument against.

Once again, the only person who has suggested that "not getting spanked makes someone a sissy" is you. You can debate that, but you'll be arguing with yourself.

 

[Stoniphi]

Gee bill, you seem a little confused about what exactly constitutes a "straw man" argument as well as a little forgetful about what you post up here.

...The threat of violence should be only one part of a parent's repertoire...

The sad fact that new-agey touchy feely parenting books often gloss over is that the world is a dangerous place....

So yes, in some cases you deal with them through threats...

In some cases he might even get spanked for doing that, and that will keep him safer as well...

They should use punishment as a deterrent for dangerous activities....

You are clearly stating that violence and the threat of violence is to be recommended as a normal part of child raising. It is not. To the contrary, it is harmful to both the parent and the child.

You very much appear to accuse me of getting my information from some "new - agey touchy feely parenting book", so I informed you of both where I got my education on this topic, how long I have been at it and a clear description as to how very NOT "new - agey touchy feely" a parent I am....so you criticize me for an honest response? :shrug:

If you had not suggested that my son was naive and at risk due to your illusions about my parenting style I would not have presented personal facts that should indicate the contrary.

If/when you have a child or children, you may perhaps have some better insights to offer. At this time however, you seem mostly to just need to somehow "win" this discussion.

As for my having anything else "fun" - yes, I certainly do possess many objects of great interest and curiosity of both scientific and cultural nature. I also have a respectable martial arts weapons collection. If you are really interested in all of that stuff, you can ask me about it in a thread dedicated to that subject rather than trying to jack this thread on the use of violence on children.

 

[charles brough]

I don't know why you two can't be more civil. There is too much hostility and vitriol here!

I side with Bivilion but offer no more argument in this thread because of the tone it has taken . . .:truce::truce:

 

[billvon]

You are clearly stating that violence and the threat of violence is to be recommended as a normal part of child raising.

No, I'm not. It is a last resort.

It's akin to using a gun to kill someone. You have proudly listed your assortment of deadly weapons, and have suggested that there are "appropriate times" for them. Does that mean you are clearly stating that violence and the threat of violence is to be recommended as part of one's normal life? (And to be clear, that's a rhetorical question; I expect your answer to be "no.")

You very much appear to accuse me of getting my information from some "new - agey touchy feely parenting book"

No, I said that such books gloss over the fact that the world is a dangerous place, and are thus misleading and incomplete. Do you disagree?

If you had not suggested that my son was naive . . .

I didn't.

I'm not sure why you are getting so angry, or why you are making up positions to argue against. I'm sure you'd be a pretty reasonable person if I met you in the real world.

 

[Stoniphi]

I have merely responded to your statements, there is no need to insert your speculation as to my motivation. That I disagree with you has nothing to do with emotion, a lot to do with a topic I am educated in.

Your choice to insert emotional motivation is your choice.

...You have proudly listed...

"proudly" is clearly an emotional assignment, much akin to "putting words in anothers mouth". If that is how you wish to engage others in dialogue, than you should continue. I will however point it out when you do so.

Human beings are the principle predator on this planet. Our methodology is violence. 16 people were shot here last weekend in 10 incidents, 7 died as a result. I was in 1 potentially violent confrontation this week. Violence and the threat of violence are a part of my world. I have studied violence for many years and am well versed in the topic and practice. You seem to have an issue with that for some reason, but that is your issue.

It is unfortunate that you do not appear to be familiar with how others live and the environments they live in. I laud your efforts to learn about topics you are unfamiliar with, but caution you against assigning speculative motivations to people that you do not know. If/when you have children I urge you to learn alternative methods to corporeal violence as child training technique. I assure you that this is the best for all concerned.

 

[wynn]

Then you have never spent any significant amount of time with rats or dogs. Behavior that is rewarded is reinforced.

And you don't seem to know what a theory or a perspective is.


The statement "Behavior that is rewarded is reinforced" is an observation based on a particular theory, namely that of reward and punishment.

Two people could be doing the same things, get the same results - but explain them in very different ways.

 

[wynn]

No, I said that such books gloss over the fact that the world is a dangerous place, and are thus misleading and incomplete. Do you disagree?

Here we would need some specific titles of such "new - agey touchy feely parenting book".

Many books on parenting have chapters on how to deal with bullies and such.

Unless, of course, by failing to teach children the fact that "the world is a dangerous place", it is meant that those "new - agey touchy feely parenting books" fail to note that one's own family is part of that world and just like it.

Ie. that a good parenting book is one that teaches the parent to be willing to see their child in the same manner as one would see street thugs, and a book that teaches children to be willing to see their siblings and parents and other relatives in the same manner as street thugs - and to adopt those same defensive/safety behaviors that are suitable for dealing with street thugs also in one's home, in relation to one's children, or siblings, parents and other relatives.